Bernardo de La Paz
Bernardo de La Paz's JournalGerrymandering has large impact on Presidential Elections. 2024 depends on 2021 depends on 2020/2018
Gerrymandering --> Republicon state majorities --> Voter Suppression laws --> Electoral College swings --> Trump-Putin-Bannon-Jarvanka
The 2020 census is the lead-in to the 2021 redistricting that will have a large impact on voter suppression laws that could have a big impact on the 2024 election, just as it has had in the past.
A swing of only 3 Electoral College votes would have elected President Al Gore in 2000.
A swing of only 18 Electoral College votes would have elected President John Kerry in 2004.
A swing of only 70,000 votes in 3 states would have elected President Hillary Clinton in 2016.
Michigan, 0.23%
Pennsylvania, 0.72%
Wisconsin, 0.76%
Republicons know this. You should too.
The Democratic Party needs to win state legislatures each one individually in 2018 and 2020. All Democratic state legislatures need to lock redistricting into permanent independent commissions that work according to rational principles for the most democratic (small d) representation possible.
Yes, it is a major social change that can be & MUST be anticipated & PLANNED for.
Wealth and income inequality is a huge problem already, and it will get worse before it gets better.
The coming changes of robots and AI (sometimes AI on its own) will make huge changes in society whether we are ready or not. They are coming and pandering to coal miners in Pennsylvania is not going to stop it.
We should be ready and we can be ready.
Excellent. Also it is something to counter those who say "When they go low we should too"
When they lie, bury them in truths.
When they cheat, bury them in litigation.
When they slander, bury them in shame.
When they go racist, bury them in disgrace.
When they go ignorant, bury them in science.
When they go emotional, bury them in their own emotions.
Don't seek originality. Seek individuality.
You are an original.
If you make your photography as much you as possible, it will be as original as you can make it and you won't have to try to be "original". You already are original.
Don't fool yourself, NK can nuke Japan, maybe once. Once is too much.
On the other hand, NK can't be allowed to hold everybody hostage just because they can nuke Japan.
There are NO easy solutions, but we can be sure that tRump will find something and think that it is easy and then RepubliCONs will fall into line.
Probably the best solution is aggressive deterrence while seeming to do nothing. Ring N Korea with force such that if they do something really stupid they will get hammered and pounded. It drives war-mongers nuts, but containment has worked well in many situations and it reduces third party suffering to almost nil.
Being too overt and too showy and escalatory and chest-thumping is really bad strategy.
Examine the posting records of high velocity posters for CONCERN trolling.
Look especially for those who signed up recently (last few months) and have averaged more than 5 or 10 posts a day. Of course many of those posters are legitimate, but it is the first stage of filtering.
Then look among those for posters who have a high number of [font size = "+1"]concern[/font] posts. I'm not a star member (for various reasons) so I can't do this kind of research.
Concern trolling is a passive-aggressive way to get people stirred up. It is favored by trolls because it is not a direct frontal attack on a member or a community policy or community consensus.
"Why is Bernie not helping as much as he could?"
"Couldn't Hillary have tried harder?"
... and so on and so forth, etcetera, etcetera.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/1/632558/-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2014/01/13/enter-the-concern-troll/
The second is condescending, insincere, manipulative. It even says so in the Urban Dictionary definition.
The darkest moment is always just after the concern trolls start pouring in.
“I’m with you,” the concern troll says. “But surely you must see how this looks to people. Not me, of course. But other people. They might think horrible things of you. People might think you were self-centered, fat, slow, rude. Not me, of course. I’m with you. I have your best interests at heart. That’s why I want to warn you. I, you see, know how this ought to be done.”
There is some Faceless Someone out there who is absolutely merciless. That Faceless Someone is saying or might say Terrible, Awful Things.
The concern troll does not agree, of course. But the concern troll wants to make sure you know.
Truly, it is because of the fundamental principle: "Innocent until proven guilty".
Think it through. It's the "proven" part that takes time to build. In criminal cases you have to [font size = "+1"]prove the charge "beyond a reasonable doubt".[/font]
It's a high hurdle and we don't like it any more than a hard-right guy likes it when somebody (perhaps of color) is accused of violent crime. But we both live with it (when we pause to think about it) because we know that it helps protect the innocent.
This case is very large and complex. It is bigger and more involved than Watergate, which took two years. Watergate did not have a foreign antagonistic nation attacking us. It did not involved a rat's nest maze of numbered corporations and shady wire transfers. It did not involve tax-dodging sneaky business people highly skilled at hiding dealings.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayMember since: Fri Jul 16, 2004, 11:36 PM
Number of posts: 49,001
